Animation similarities

LSPoorEeyorick · 04-06-2009, 08:19 PM

I don't think she was saying it vindicates it, exactly. I think she was saying, given the option of hollow, unfunny CGI (as on the Disney Channel cartoons of Mickey, which utilize zero slapstick or visual comedy) even a copied sequence is better. Seriously, watch the crap that passes for a Mickey cartoon these days and see if you don't prefer Lady Cluck. I certainly do.

And honestly, until a few years ago, I didn't realize any of the dance sequence was a direct copy - and until I saw the video in question, I didn't realize how much of the physicality was copied.

I'm not upset at "lazy" animators - it's not their fault that, say, their budgets were cut, or that they were flopping around without a guide like Walt. The "dark years" happened for a reason - it's really the leadership of a creative company that guides its filmmakers to innovation (or to retreading what once was innovation.) A real, true creative visionary is a rare gift indeed, and what happens when they're gone? Struggle, until animators like the Mermaid team pull themselves up by their collective bootstraps. But even then, they couldn't have done it without the support of a strong creative leader - which, as much as all of you hate Eisner, he really was (in tandem with Wells, at least.)

Cadaverous Pallor · 04-06-2009, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

I don't think she was saying it vindicates it, exactly. I think she was saying, given the option of hollow, unfunny CGI (as on the Disney Channel cartoons of Mickey, which utilize zero slapstick or visual comedy) even a copied sequence is better. Seriously, watch the crap that passes for a Mickey cartoon these days and see if you don't prefer Lady Cluck. I certainly do.

TV shows have never had the quality of movies. Original Mickey cartoons were made for the theater.

Quote:

I'm not upset at "lazy" animators...

All I'm saying - the methods and the quality are crappy. I know this has to do with a myriad of factors. I do not blame one specific group. It's not going out on a limb to say that these movies are badly made.

As a person who understands the frustrations of the creative process (and empathizes with those that have to work within financial and business constraints) I'm not here to point fingers, I'm just saying, the end product sucks.

I thought that goes without saying.

04-06-2009, 08:19 PM	#1
LSPoorEeyorick scribblin' Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: in the moment Posts: 3,872	I don't think she was saying it vindicates it, exactly. I think she was saying, given the option of hollow, unfunny CGI (as on the Disney Channel cartoons of Mickey, which utilize zero slapstick or visual comedy) even a copied sequence is better. Seriously, watch the crap that passes for a Mickey cartoon these days and see if you don't prefer Lady Cluck. I certainly do. And honestly, until a few years ago, I didn't realize any of the dance sequence was a direct copy - and until I saw the video in question, I didn't realize how much of the physicality was copied. I'm not upset at "lazy" animators - it's not their fault that, say, their budgets were cut, or that they were flopping around without a guide like Walt. The "dark years" happened for a reason - it's really the leadership of a creative company that guides its filmmakers to innovation (or to retreading what once was innovation.) A real, true creative visionary is a rare gift indeed, and what happens when they're gone? Struggle, until animators like the Mermaid team pull themselves up by their collective bootstraps. But even then, they couldn't have done it without the support of a strong creative leader - which, as much as all of you hate Eisner, he really was (in tandem with Wells, at least.)
	Submit to Quotes